Quote:
Originally Posted by Whatever
Stronghold was my first year as a mentor in FRC. I have been interested in the OPR statistic. One thing I have noticed is it commonly gets quoted to 2 decimal places which seems like way too much accuracy.
|
Thank you for your post, glad to have you involved in
FIRST
SigFigs, or significant digits are maligned by students and professionals.
By definition: "Significant Figures are used in measurements and calculations. They indicate the numbers that have meaning.
The limits of precision of the measurement tool limit the number of digits that have meaning in any calculated result.
A calculated result cannot be more precise than the least precise measurement."
Excessive digits are hyperbole.
Like curse words, they are sometimes used to imply more weight to ones opinions or answers than is justified by the underlying data.
I can at times surmise a students confidence in their calculated answers by the number of digits it contains. (BTW, inverse)
Your error bar analysis and scenarios is a good exercise.
It would be interesting to see more analyses that may tease out variabilities.
One issue with "Obsessive Performance" Ratio is the sample size.
Another wildcard is the design iterations that occur over a season.
And there is always the strategy of picking complementary designs for an alliance.
This is where scouting becomes an intellectual exercise. There are many sources of data, OPR is a good quantitative metric, but dynamic performance at an immediate competition (a Robot getting much better through "piteration" and drive time, a Robot experiencing cascading crucial component failures, bad schedule, or a Robot that doesn't score a lot but can assist well), can reveal dark horses and lame ducks.
Took the summer off from the team, presented today with our new captains for Freshman Orientation.
Mentor meeting tonight.
2017 starts on 9/12.
The juices are starting to flow again.
137 days to Kickoff.